Dental Marketing: Negative Online Review Appears as a Facebook Page

negative dental page on FacebookIn the past The Wealthy Dentist has written about negative online reviews in such articles as Appeals Court Says Yes to Dentist Lawsuit Against Patient for Online Review andWhen a Dentist’s Relationship Goes Bad on the Internet — both stories about harmful dental critiques posted on review sites like Yelp and Angie’s List.

But in August of this year, Chris Cook of Bakersfield, CA, pushed negative online reviews to a new level.

It was reported in dental news site DrBicuspid.com that Mr.  Cook took his 5-year-old son to see Bakersfield pediatric dentist Edward Dove, DDS, for a tooth extraction. Mr. Cook claims Dr. Dove mistreated his son during that visit by extracting a tooth before the child was adequately sedated.

According to DrBiCuspid.com, Cook stated that his son vomited up most of the sedative, screamed, and urinated on himself while allegedly being held down by three dental assistants during the procedure.  Allegations Dr. Dove vehemently denies.

Chris Cook decided to take matters into his own hands and created the “I Hate Dr. Dove of Bakersfield” page on Facebook, attracting more than 200 members in its first 48 hours.

Luckily for Dr. Dove, Facebook does have a policy for pages with the word “hate” and considers them in strict violation of their terms of service.  They swiftly moved to shut down the dental hate page.

Cook was undaunted by the Facebook boot, turned around and created a second Facebook group page, “Bakersfield dentist DOES NOT ROCK!!!!!!!!!” which is still up and active.

Dr. Dove has handled the situation by defending his treatment in the press and pointing to his 23 years in practice without a single disciplinary action. He has chosen not to engage with Chris Cook on his Facebook page, and was quoted in Dr Bicuspid as saying, “I think my reputation will be hurt a little bit, but right now I just want to calm down,” Dr. Dove said, “This guy is going ballistic, he’s trying to smear me, and I’m getting bullied.”

But should Dr. Dove be more concerned?

Just how significant are bad reviews for the future of your dental practice?

A new survey by market analysis firm Cone, Inc., found that four out of five consumers have reversed purchase decisions based on negative reviews found on the Internet. Another survey by Ratepoint found that 40 percent of consumers indicated they are more likely to consider a local business when they respond to a negative online review.

In the case of a Facebook page being dedicated to hating a dental practice, a dentist has little recourse since the unhappy page creator would have to allow the dentist to join the group page in order to issue a response.

Dentists have had little luck in defamation lawsuits when it comes to negative online reviews since the courts tend to look upon unhappy reviews as free speech. In a recent defamation case in California, a dentist has been ordered to pay $80,000 in attorney fees to the parents who posted a negative online review.

So how do you combat something like a negative Facebook page?

By making sure your dental practice has more than one website that appears on the top pages of Google when your business (and personal) name is searched online. Also have your own Facebook page, or pages for each type of treatment you offer. Have a Twitter page and make sure your practice is listed in as many dental directories as you can find. The idea is to control what appears on the first page of Google about your dental practice. Regular press releases help with this too.

For solutions to multiple name search and directory listing go to: www.InternetDentalAlliance.com.

For more on this story see: Facebook Pulls Plug on Angry Dad’s Antidentist Page

A Little Periodontitis Mistake That Cost a Dentist $200,000

periodontitis malpractice lawsuitA dental patient has sued his dentist for malpractice, claiming supervised neglect, which caused him periodontitis.

Former patient Harry Berkowitz asked for compensatory damages from his dentist Dr. Dennis Miller (D.D.S) for his failure in diagnosing the periodontal disease that was silently progressing for years and ultimately destroying his teeth.

WorldDental.org reports that Berkowitz, who was a steady patient of Dr. Miller, always maintained regular dental checkups. It was at just one of these regular check-ups in 2009 where Berkowtiz learned from his Physician that he would need extensive root canal therapy. Since this seemed out of the ordinary from his usual dental treatments, Berkowitz decided to obtain a second opinion with another dentist.

The second dentist told Harry Berkowitz that he was apparently suffering from a severe periodontal disease that was badly affecting all his upper teeth. He was referred to a periodontist who extracted all but two of his upper teeth and then replaced them with permanent bridges and dental implants.

In his legal claim against his regular dentist, Mr. Berkowitz stated he was never asked for an x-ray examination to diagnose the periodontal disease that claimed most of his upper teeth. Dr. Miller countered this allegation by stating that he had suggested several treatment options to Berkowitz over the 20 years he was his patient, but Berkowitz declined some of the doctor’s treatment suggestions by insisting that full dental care would be too expensive.

The malpractice case was settled in the amount of $200,000.

When I first started as a dental management consultant — over 20 years ago — attorneys were attending seminars on how to sue dentists for periodontal neglect. And of course I had one of my doctors sued for this. The case was dismissed when we presented the scheduling book (yes a real hard copy book) showing the patient had missed or no-showed for continuing care appointments eleven times in a two-year period.

The issue was documentation of the patients failure to accept and complete treatment. Your ultimate protection is to dismiss the patient!

How do you screen for periodontitis? What do you do when patients refuse your dental treatment suggestions?

For more on this story see: Matters of the Law: Patient Sues Dentist for Neglect.

Dentists: Can Copyright Law Protect You from Negative Online Reviews?

dentists and copyright lawOnline dental reviews can be a problem for dentists when negative reviews appear, especially when they feel the review is possibly retaliatory or bogus.

A few thousand doctors have taken matters into their own hands by working with a company called Medical Justice, that created a way to use copyright law to go after negative online reviews.

For about $100.00 a month, Medical Justice protects its doctors by going to online review sites and demanding any bad reviews be removed due to “a breach of copyright.” The company instructs doctors to have their patients sign contracts that assign away the copyright in any future review the patient might be compelled to write online.

Techland Times reports that Medical Justice claims what they’re doing is not only protecting the doctors from unfair bad press, but also from bogus reviews. “Some sites say, we don’t know if you’re telling truth, and we don’t know if they’re telling the truth — it’s the Internet, so deal with it,” contends Shane Stadler of Medical Justice.

Moco News writes that by having patients assign copyright in any reviews to their doctor, Medical Justice is hoping to help doctors get around Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (an “arcane nuance of cyberlaw,” according to Medical Justice’s website), the law that protects web services from getting sued over content posted by their users.

It is being reported that Yelp has refused to honor a doctor’s take-down notice based on copyright infringement, and another online review website called RateMDs created a “Wall of Shame” to identify doctors who are using the copyright contracts.

Sound unreasonable? Do you think it’s irrational to demand dental patients sign a copyright assignment form when they visit a dentist office?

For more on this story see Doctors Now Using Breach of Copyright to Quash Bad Online Reviews and Can Doctors Use Copyright Law To Get Rid Of Negative Reviews?

Dental Practice Fraud Causes 200k Embezzlement Warning

dental embezzlementThe Colorado Dental Association recently sent an email alert to member dentists regarding a $200,000+ embezzlement that occurred in a dental practice related to the processing of credit cards.

According to the Metropolitan Denver Dental Society, experts estimate that more than 50% of dentists are embezzled with an average loss of $50,000.

But, because embezzlers often steal relatively small amounts over a long period of time, the misappropriation of funds goes unnoticed.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimates that 75 percent of all employees steal at least once, and that half of these steal repeatedly. The Denver District Attorney’s Office website warns, “embezzlement is at epidemic proportions accounting for 20 percent of all cases filed by the Denver District Attorney’s Economic Crime Unit.” In 1970, one in 200 employees was dishonest; it is estimated that today, one in six employees is dishonest.

The MDDS states that the most common method of embezzlement in a dental practice occurs through theft of cash, checks or supplies.

Here are a few embezzlement scenarios that occur in dental practices –

  • Cash is pocketed from patients.
  • Petty cash is stolen.
  • Cash or checks are removed from the daily deposits and replaced with subsequent receipts.
  • Insurance fraud.
  • Endorsements are forged.
  • Writing duplicate accounts payable checks or writing checks to phony vendors.
  • Stealing supplies and re-selling or returning to vendors for refunds that are pocketed by employees.

In a survey The Wealthy Dentist performed in 2010, 59% of the dentists surveyed said they had discovered evidence of embezzlement. With such a high degree of fraud, how does a dentist diminish the risk of embezzlement?

The American Bar Association offers the following checklist on how to prevent fraud and embezzlement –

  • Adopt an effective, documented system of internal controls to protect against acts of dishonest staff.
  • Bank and credit card statements can be delivered to the business owner’s home or separate address for personal review.
  • Checks and debit transactions should be reviewed with the statements.
  • Checks should require two signatures, or be reviewed by the owner.
  • A copy of the bank reconciliation should be attached to each monthly bank statement and reviewed by two parties.
  • Finance or accounting personnel should not be signers on all bank accounts.
  • Checks received in the mail should be immediately endorsed by a two-person team who opens and processes the mail.
  • After checks are properly endorsed and verified, the bookkeeper should take charge of the checks for deposit.

Have you recently experienced embezzlement in your dental practice?

For more on employee embezzlement and how to prevent it see – The Metropolitan Denver Dental Society Watchdog

Dentists Weigh In on the Dental X-ray and Brain Tumor Debate

More Dentists Weigh In on the Dental X-ray and Brain Tumor DebateGiven the recent negative publicity surrounding dental X-rays and brain tumors, our recent The Wealthy Dentist survey covered whether dental practices will change how they use X-rays.

We asked:

“According to a recent study, dental X-rays may be linked with brain tumors. Will this news change how your practice uses X-rays?”

Here’s how dentists responded:

  • 66%: Definitely no!
  • 25%: Not at this point, although this study has led us to consider it.
  • 9%: Yes, we will be changing our X-ray protocols.

Two thirds of dentists debated the validity of the data. Urban dentists over rural dentists were the most vocal about their skepticism in this survey.

“This study is highly flawed. The number of cancers per population is so small. You could die from an abscess more than your chance of getting this cancer. I read there are 5000 cancers per 350 million people?”

But some dentists did take the X-ray study into consideration —

“We will take this opportunity to reinforce our office position as an industry leader in all phases of patient safety.” (General dentist)

“It’s quite possible, some correlation between brain tumors and old ways to take X-rays. Let’s don’t forget we went from regular films to high speed to a digital generation decreasing every time the amount of radiation.” (Florida dentist)

“We use digital X-rays and take updated X-rays only when necessary.” (Ohio dentist)

“We are using digital radiographs and feel that we do everything possible to minimize unnecessary exposure.” (Texas dentist)

“I believe we have to make the right choices for our patients: how often – how many medical conditions. We also have to look at our society and what devices we use on a regular basis: cell phones, microwaves, electric blankets, TVs, air plane flights, not to mention our landfills loaded with hazardous materials. With technology comes risks but also life-saving devices and techniques.” (Massachusetts dentist)

“We decided on digital films prior to this announcement.” (General dentist)

IF the study is correct, it will certainly affect the number of radiographs a dentist will record.” (Pediatric dentist)

“We’ve been doing the 18 mos to 2 yrs for many years. Only a select few of our dental patients require more frequent radiographic diagnosis.” (Arizona dentist)

“Further thoughts, yes, on this study that was flawed in concept.” (Oklahoma dentist)

“I’ve used a digital sensor for over a dozen years and have always been ultra-conservative in ordering X-rays based on the dental patient’s current and past oral conditions, not on a fixed timetable.” (Illinois dentist)

“We already stretch the limits on our X-rays and consider the history of the patient in doing so.” (California dentist)

“We are empowering our clinical team with information so that they may respond to concerns from patients. We also posted our rebuttal on our Website and Facebook page. We preform x-rays annually and/or on as needed basis.” (West Virginia dentist)

“Should always practice conservatively and limit taking dental (or chest) X-rays to the minimum at all times. I do not agree with taking X-rays ROUTINELY. (California dentist)

251 dentists responded to this survey by The Wealthy Dentist. To hear what the more agitated dentists had to say about the dental X-ray and brain tumor debate, see last week’s article, Dentists React To Dental X-ray Brain Tumor Study as Flawed Science.

What are your thoughts on the dental X-ray and brain cancer debate?

Disclaimer

© 2017, The Wealthy Dentist - Dental Marketing - All Rights Reserved - Dental Website Marketing Site Map

The Wealthy Dentist® - Contact by email - Privacy Policy

P.O. Box 1220, Tiburon, CA 94920

The material on this website is offered in conjunction with MasterPlan Alliance.

Copyright 2017 Du Molin & Du Molin, Inc. All rights reserved. If you would like to use material from this site, our reports, articles, training programs
or tutorials for use in any printed or electronic media, please ask permission first by email.